If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You will have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

What do you think of the fighter I modified?

Hey all, Been DMing a long time and one of the things that I can say I never really agreed with was how not very good the fighter was in 3rd ed.

I went through eh.. maybe 5 or 6 variations before I finally settled on a final product. you might not beleive me but it came to me in a dream and i was like "YES!"

anyways to keep it short and sweet i'll just tell you the changes

they get a d12 HD.
think of the sword sage maneuver progress but without discipline restrictions, and the desert wind style can be any of the following elememts, not just fire (Acid, cold Electricity and fire)

lastly the crowning acheivment I thought of was a cool ability called combat focus, At 2nd level a fighter enters into a heightende combat state if he scores a successful attack that deals damage, that states last 2 rounds ( and yes it stacks so to pseak if you keep having a successful attack every round)
it gives the following benefits, and a fighter can only go into combat focus if the majority of his character levels is fighter. ( this is to prevent say a mage taking 2 levels in fighter then casting acid splash to keep up all of these various buffs)

@ 2nd
guardian glare- -2 to attacks -1 for every 4th level to enemies trying to hit your allies that are adjacent to you.
Hardened - +2 to will saves +1 for every 4th level only against fear and charms
@3rd- Alertness as a bonus feat
Combat Defense- gain the uncanny dodge ability (this does not stack with any other form of uncanny dodge so a rouge fighter than has uncanny dodge form his rogues levels cannot while under combat focus get improved uncanny dodge)
@5th Inherent Citadel - +1 insight bonus to AC for every 5th level
@9th Combat evasion - +2 to refelx saves and an addition +1 for every 5th level after 9th.

anyways, what do you guys think so far about a fighter being able to do this, this is something that i have just finished polishing up and is just now being used in a real campaign by a real player, not just me playtesting them.

they are not that high of level yet so the more powerful strikes like time stand still etc are not being used. but the GUardian glare has saved teh ranger's life once so far something that I am happy about.

on a side note. I also don't use and have actually NEVER used teh AD&D/D&D bard. for me they should sing songs/play instruments not cast spells. while they might seem a bit weird, they are actually incrediably amazing support characters so far, how I have alwasy seen a bard myself, you stand back and make everythihg everybodyd oes a great deal better, and sometimes you do some good things, The bard does not seem to be very popular class to play for some odd reason, but the one guy I had play one for a good chunk of the campaign, absolutely loved how the bard played out. SO as long as the one guy who played a bard was incrediably satisfied with it, it puts a smile on my face :)

Re: What do you think of the fighter I modified?

That was a mouthful! Here, let me help you.

Originally Posted by Kenneth

Hey all, I've been DMing for a long time, and one of the things that I never really like was how poorly the 3e fighter performed compared to other classes. I've gone through perhaps 5 or 6 variations before finally settling on a final product. You might not believe me, but it came to me in a dream; I woke up very excited about this idea of mine.

Short and sweet:
- Increase HD to a d12
- grant Swordsage maneuver progression, without restriction on disciplines
- Desert Wind can mimic any standard element, including fire
- new combat ability, described below

Combat Focus
- At 2nd level a fighter enters a heightened combat state if he scores a successful, damage-dealing attack. This state lasts for 2 rounds, and can be triggered recurrently during those rounds, extending the duration. The fighter can only enter this state if the majority of his levels are in fighter, to prevent other classes from benefiting from this feature without keeping fighters from multiclassing.

At 2nd level, the fighter gains these benefits
- Guardian Glare: you penalize your attackers, giving them a -2 penalty to attacks against allies adjacent to you, with an additional -1 penalty for every 4 fighter levels you possess
- Hardened: you gain a +2 bonus to Will saves against fear and charms, with an additional +1 bonus for every 4 fighter levels you possess

At 3rd level you gain these benefits
- Combat Defense: the fighter gains the uncanny dodge ability (as the barbarian ability of the same name). If the fighter already has uncanny dodge from another class, this does not stack with it, so they don't get anything more.

At 5th level
- Inherent Citadel: the fighter gains a +1 dodge bonus to AC, and an additional +1 dodge bonus for every 5 fighter levels he possesses.

Anyways, what do you guys think about this fighter variant? This is something I just finished, and is just now being used in a current campaign. The character is not of too high a level yet, so the more powerful abilities from the Tome of Battle are not yet in play, but the Guardian Glare seems good; it has saved the rangers life once so far, and that is something that I am happy about.

As a side note: I've never played a bard character. I think they should just sing songs, and not cast any spells. They seem weird, but are actually great support characters, standing at the back of the fight and providing lots of support and buffs to the party. The bard doesn't seem popular for some odd reason, but the guy playing the bard seems to really enjoy it. As long as he likes it, I like it too. :)

Re: What do you think of the fighter I modified?

Now for my real reply.

This seems really slap-dash. The abilities you have granted to the fighter just mirror strikes and stances from the Crusader's disciplines, but with a d12 Hit Die. On top of that, you've granted fast maneuver progression, with no discipline restrictions, which I think is too powerful considering the fighter is already swimming in combat feats.

I think this class variant is still not as effective as it could be, as it is disjointed and redundant within itself. You have merely given it abilities that mirror abilities gained by other classes -- it doesn't have any unique class features. Most of it's later gain, like the dodge and save bonuses, can be replicated in relatively cheap magic items.

I would not play this class, and I think it still needs a lot of work.

Re: What do you think of the fighter I modified?

Well like I said think of a sword sage maneuver progression, I did not give him the actualy Swordsage progression at all, but something closer to it than say the warblade or crusader. sort of a hal way point bwteen warblade and sworsage.

and I am pretty sure the combat focus is pretty unique to teh fighter all those level depentandt buffs only occur if the fighter is in that combat focus state.

This campaign i am planning is set to go up to lvl 20 (maybe 21 if they do a couple option sidequests) so I am like most do when considering class balance looking at the level 20 version of this.

To clearifyl about the maneuvers more, a fighter cna only only know 2 of each tier of maneuver ( i call them something else besides manuevers but I cannot reall and im too lazy to go get my papers LOL) except for tier 1 and tier 9 ones. which at level 20 they get 3 of each.

Also I made the higher level maneuvers replace the lower level ones, so strikie of righteous viatliy completele replaces crusader stirke etc.

with this in mind there are only ~50 or so maneuvers that I actually am using (5 or 6 for each tier) again with a fighter only being able to know 2 (or in the case of T1 and T9 maneuvers 3) and the fact that out of the 20 a fighter can know total, with the higher tier ones completely overriding the lower ones. a fighter typically ends up knowing only 10 or 12 manuevers. te most a fighter can know ( thats stricyly only taking overriding maneuvers when it is absolutly necassary) he can know 15. so now that i actually look at the numbers it is more closely related to the strike progression of a crusader.

anyways, What would it take for you toplay a fighter in my campaign? what suggestions do you have for me that will make it more effective?

Re: What do you think of the fighter I modified?

I'd say that rather than adding new class features in addition to or instead of the feats, add new class features as the feats. It'll keep much more of the flavor of the old fighter.
In order to make the new features fighter-specific, either make them at the end of a large enough feat chain that nobody else can reasonably get them (a fighter gets roughly 2.5 times as many feats by level 20 as anyone else, so what's unfeasible for them can be reasonable for him) or simply give it a fighter-level prerequisite.

Re: What do you think of the fighter I modified?

Originally Posted by DoomHat

What in the existing ToB classes are you not satisfied with?

The overall anime oriental martial art feel of the styles the ToB classes get, I focus more on the classic fantasy ( read mideval european) than the oriental. the MAJOR dislike about teh classes is the limits as to what dsiciplines they can take. ( againt his is roote din teh oritnal martial art cast that i dislike for my games)to me a warrior has a choice, much like a wizard, he can just focus on 1 weapon or combat style and become very very skilled at it, or he can become an expert in all of them, never matching the single focus guy in his chose field, but more than able to be equal due to his ability to be well rounded ( the same philosophy Bruce lee had about the martila arts and what was inherently wrong with them)

I rooted out all of the maneuvers that I felt was a bit too anime-ish for me and got rid of stances all together, as Yitzi stated I had the majority of those as feats (well feats that closely resembled a lot of those stances before the ToB even came out)

When i first played my ToB character did I enjoy him Yes, I did, somewhat. I didn't care that most of my abilites were very anime-ish and for the most part stayed away from those, probably gimping my character a bit, LUCKLY though... those particualr ones are actually not the majority.

I may be investing too much of my own persoanl feel on the ToB, but that is just what I get from it.

My goal here was to make something that was balanced against the wizard at level 20 ( I don't have to worry about blanacing the other so called tier 1 classes due to my gaming style)

this is something that I am hoping that when, and if, they do get to level 20 and set out on the last streatch of this particular campaign, the guy playing the fighter will be able to do some amazing things to which the wizard can then say "holy crap.. you just did what?"

Maybe I am too old school and just need to get with the times, but I have just always felt the fighter should be the backbone of a party, when there IS a fighter in the party. ( I would not gimp a party that consisted of a paladin, ranger, shaman, wizard, and a rogue because there was no fighter)

Re: What do you think of the fighter I modified?

Originally Posted by Kenneth

The overall anime oriental martial art feel of the styles the ToB classes get, I focus more on the classic fantasy ( read mideval european) than the oriental. the MAJOR dislike about teh classes is the limits as to what dsiciplines they can take. ( againt his is roote din teh oritnal martial art cast that i dislike for my games)to me a warrior has a choice, much like a wizard, he can just focus on 1 weapon or combat style and become very very skilled at it, or he can become an expert in all of them, never matching the single focus guy in his chose field, but more than able to be equal due to his ability to be well rounded ( the same philosophy Bruce lee had about the martila arts and what was inherently wrong with them)

I rooted out all of the maneuvers that I felt was a bit too anime-ish for me and got rid of stances all together, as Yitzi stated I had the majority of those as feats (well feats that closely resembled a lot of those stances before the ToB even came out)

When i first played my ToB character did I enjoy him Yes, I did, somewhat. I didn't care that most of my abilites were very anime-ish and for the most part stayed away from those, probably gimping my character a bit, LUCKLY though... those particualr ones are actually not the majority.

I may be investing too much of my own persoanl feel on the ToB, but that is just what I get from it.

My goal here was to make something that was balanced against the wizard at level 20 ( I don't have to worry about blanacing the other so called tier 1 classes due to my gaming style)

this is something that I am hoping that when, and if, they do get to level 20 and set out on the last streatch of this particular campaign, the guy playing the fighter will be able to do some amazing things to which the wizard can then say "holy crap.. you just did what?"

Maybe I am too old school and just need to get with the times, but I have just always felt the fighter should be the backbone of a party, when there IS a fighter in the party. ( I would not gimp a party that consisted of a paladin, ranger, shaman, wizard, and a rogue because there was no fighter)

Just a couple of things I want to point out, take it as you will:

-Animé is not a genre, it is a medium.

-There is a way to master all disciplines: the Master of Nine.

-By making all disciplines available, you are actually making your fighter more shonen. Warblades and Crusaders have very few maneuvers that could be interpreted as such, they're mostly Swordsage-exclusive. (Desert Wind and Shadow Hand.)

-This class may be stronger than other martial classes, but it is nowhere near the power Wizards have, and there is frankly almost nothing you can do to remedy that fact. People have tried to make Tier 1 melee before, but no one has ever succeeded, to the best of my knowledge. Tier 2 is possible (Frank and K), It's just an unfortunate aspect of 3.5,

Re: What do you think of the fighter I modified?

Originally Posted by dragonsamurai77

-This class may be stronger than other martial classes, but it is nowhere near the power Wizards have, and there is frankly almost nothing you can do to remedy that fact. People have tried to make Tier 1 melee before, but no one has ever succeeded, to the best of my knowledge. Tier 2 is possible (Frank and K), It's just an unfortunate aspect of 3.5,

Tier 1 isn't just power, it's flexibility. No matter how hard you can stab people, you still can't Charm Person or Teleport or Wall of Stone or ... etc.

That said, it's hardly a uniquely fantasy idea to restrict people to some disciplines. Consider a German using a zwiehander to a French person using a florentine style. Are they both fighters? Well, they are both people that fight with weapons. Are their styles the same? Hardly.

Re: What do you think of the fighter I modified?

The overall anime oriental martial art feel of the styles the ToB classes get, I focus more on the classic fantasy ( read mideval european) than the oriental.

Like monk you mean? Y'know, the guys based on Kenshiro from Fist of the North Star?

the MAJOR dislike about teh classes is the limits as to what dsiciplines they can take. ( againt his is roote din teh oritnal martial art cast that i dislike for my games)

How is this rooted in "teh oritnal martial art"? Paladins can't choose to get Two-Weapon Fighting and rangers can't choose to get rage.

to me a warrior has a choice, much like a wizard, he can just focus on 1 weapon or combat style and become very very skilled at it, or he can become an expert in all of them, never matching the single focus guy in his chose field, but more than able to be equal due to his ability to be well rounded ( the same philosophy Bruce lee had about the martila arts and what was inherently wrong with them)

So you want things to work more like martial arts?

"Martial arts", by the way, refers to all fighting techniques. Not unarmed, not Eastern. And they all had funny names. A European knight might get into the Scales Stance and perform the Fork Strike, to give one of the more mundane examples. The difference is that the Far East wrote more of their stuff down.

Re: What do you think of the fighter I modified?

ToB does not have to be "anime"-ish at all. It doesn't have to be "oriental martial arts" either. The mechanics totally support you playing a warblade or crusader as a mundane warrior, if you just change the fluff around a little bit, if that.